Mumbai, April 15, 2024 – In a case of attempted murder, the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai granted bail to one accused, Sams Kamar Hayumuddin Shaikh, while denying bail to the other, Sahil Mukhtar Sahikh. The decision was based on the differing levels of involvement and evidence against each accused.

The case pertains to C.R. No. 120/2024 registered at Trombay Police Station, where the accused were charged under Sections 307 (attempt to murder), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 506(II)¹ (criminal intimidation),² 120(B) (criminal conspiracy), 114 (abettor present when offense is committed) read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), as well as Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act and Sections 37(1)(a) read with 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.

Prosecution’s Case:

The prosecution alleged that Sahil Mukhtar Sahikh assaulted the complainant with a sword, attempting to murder him. Sams Kamar Hayumuddin Shaikh was accused of assaulting the complainant’s brother with fist blows. The investigation was ongoing, with statements from eyewitnesses yet to be recorded.

Defense Arguments:

The accused claimed innocence, stating they were falsely implicated due to enmity. They argued that the complainant suffered no injuries, and the complainant himself, in an affidavit, suggested that the attempt to murder charge was applied due to a misunderstanding. The weapon had been recovered, and they were willing to abide by any court conditions.

Informant’s Stance:

The informant appeared in court and submitted that the matter had been amicably settled between the parties and had no objection to the bail application being granted.

Court’s Observations and Decision:

Judge A.S. Salgar, after reviewing the FIR and the evidence, found significant differences in the roles attributed to the two accused.

• Sahil Mukhtar Sahikh (Accused No. 1):
  • His name was directly mentioned in the FIR, and he was accused of assaulting the complainant with a sword.
  • The weapon was recovered from him.
  • The court found prima facie evidence of his involvement.
  • Given the ongoing investigation, the court denied his bail, fearing it would hamper the investigation.
• Sams Kamar Hayumuddin Shaikh (Accused No. 2):
  • His role was limited to assaulting the complainant’s brother with fist blows.
  • He did not use any weapons.
  • There were no allegations that he assaulted the complainant or attempted to kill anyone.
  • The investigation regarding him was practically complete.
  • Therefore, the court granted him bail.

Conditions of Bail for Sams Kamar Hayumuddin Shaikh:

• He must furnish a Personal Recognizance (PR) Bond of Rs. 25,000 with one or more sureties of the like amount.
• He must attend the Trombay Police Station every Sunday between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. until the chargesheet is filed.
• He must not commit similar offenses.
• He and his sureties must provide their residential addresses, mobile numbers, and email addresses to the investigating officer.
• He must not influence witnesses or tamper with evidence.
• He must not leave India without prior court permission.
• Violation of any condition will result in bail cancellation.
• Provisional cash bail of Rs. 25,000 was allowed for four weeks to furnish surety.
• Bail to be furnished before the Ld. Trial Court.

Implications:

This decision highlights the court’s careful consideration of individual roles and evidence in multi-accused cases. The court’s willingness to grant bail when appropriate, even in serious cases, is also evident, especially when parties come to amicable agreements.